Question: If Bush invades Iran, how many troops would logically be needed

[Larkspur]

to invade and occupy that nation? This is a purely hypothetical question.

An honest general admitted that we would need 300,000 troops to occupy Iraq and with Iran being much large in territory and population, what would the number theoretically be need to occupy Iran. In case 1, assume that Iraq is peaceful. In case 2, assume that Iraq is like it is today -- chaotic.

Edited to fix header line

[LynnTheDem]

1. IraQ??? Too late.

And far more than he sent. ;)

Iran? Not possible to occupy Iran. No way no how.

Even a ful draft we couldn't occupy Iran.

[Clark2008]

2. Do you mean Iran? n/t

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

3. I think your header needs an edit...we already invaded Iraq

[havocmom]

4. Check your subject line. Didn't he already invade Iraq?

Now, IRAN, that'd be a different story

[bryant69]

5. I don't think we could afford to do both at teh same time

without a draft.

That's one reason why I think they are strongly considering pulling out after the elections.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[LynnTheDem]

6. Not possible to occupy Iran

Even with no other wars & a full draft. Can't be done.

[Sterling]

19. Change your header.

don't be so lazy. (never mind it's not you, sorry) whoever posted this thread needs to get off their ass and fix the title.

[LynnTheDem]

20. HEY you leave my header alone!

:D :D :D

[bryant69]

22. Sorry the eding period has passed

But just for you I'll type the 100 times as penace.

the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the teh the the the the the the the the the the the the

Satisfied?

Bryant

[DrWeird]

7. That's a good question.

Considering we have 150,000 troops in Iraq, it's clearly not enough to occupy it. The insurgents control all major highways, small towns, many parts of large cities, and they have US forces basically surrounded on the ground. It very much resembles the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. So in order to successfully occupy it, I'd think we'd need at least several hundred thousand more.

[htuttle]

8. Iran's standing army has roughly 700,000 troops (including support)

There are about 125,000 Revolutionary Guard members included in that number.

The Iranian government has stated that with conscription, they could field 20,000,000 ground troops to defend Iran. Entirely possible, since they've had mandatory service of one sort or another since 1926.

I don't think 300,000 troops would even come close. I do not think there are enough troops in the entire US military to occupy Iran.

[LynnTheDem]

15. You're right, there isn't.

Not even with a draft. We'd need 10-20 million. Even then we'd lose over the long haul.

[BlueEyedSon]

9. If Iraq required 400-500k (best est.), I would double that for Iran

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

10. No invasion of Iran. Air strikes..if the Israelis don't do our dirty work

With Iraq falling apart, even the most ardent flag waving won't sell another invasion to the American people. At least not one in which there would be a fight. Maybe...they might name Utah a terrorist state and invade with justifiable expectations of a cheering populace.

[htuttle]

11. If they drop bombs on Iran...

...do you think those 700,000 troops in Iran's standing army will stay on their side of the border?

I wouldn't if I were them.

[LiberallyInclined]

17. exactly.

if bombs fall on iran, the iranian military will flood into iraq, and may not stop until they reach the mediterranean.

[alittlelark]

18. I assume you missed the point....

[tridim]

12. No question.. Bush is itching to use a nuke.

Two or three should do the trick.

[LynnTheDem]

13. You'd need at least 10 MILLION troops to occupy Iran

They have 70 million people; 7:1 is still not good. 20 million troops would be much better.

There is no way, even with a draft, that we could occupy Iran.

edited to fix my figures coz I'm an idjit. :D

[KissMeKate]

14. we will use special forces and Isreal with cover of "democracy movement"

it will be under cover of the war on terror, and we will have seals, delta force, rangers, green berets, etc

and these special forces units will be broken beyond repair once Bush is finished with them.

We wont invade Iran up front- but we might provboke war between them and Isreal so Isreal has an excuse to do a little "regime change" of their own- "only helping out the democracy movement in Iran, of course!"

[LynnTheDem]

16. That would certainly solve the problem of Israel-Palestine.

Palestine would have their own state and a very large one. :D

And we're assuming Iran's allies -unlike Iraq, Iran has em- would NOT help Iran defend against an unprovoked illegal war of aggression???

Coz China's got one hell of a huge pile of soldiers...

[ladjf]

21. The number of American casualties in Iraq is directly proportionate

to the number of troops. Therefore, if we halved our number, the casualties would decrease 50%. Then if we no one there we would have zero casualties. Sounds like a good plan to me. Right now our troops are just cruising around the roads as moving target ducks, subject to being blown up at any moment. Why are we doing that?